Joe Schaefer wrote:
> "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> writes:
>
>> So, to vote to proceed here, we are basically ratifying that we accept the
>> various situations at those other JSRs. This gets complicated.
>
> It's not complicated at all if you just vote "no" on any Sun-led spec
> until they are in compliance with the JSPA. We don't need to draft
> an expansive JCP policy to determine how to vote on such JSRs.
+1. As my understanding of how the JCP works grows, the more
approriate this approach seems. It also provides a way forward in
light of the complete lack of response to our open letter.
Is another open letter called for to let them know what is coming? Is
there anything we can do to try and get other voters to take a similar
line?
Mark